Post: #101

(05-31-2018 02:02 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  Easy C - I like your reading list.
But seriously - your final assessment is you listen to prophets with visions - a nuclear war with Russia?

After all this reading you still came up with SJW-themes of "all immigration is equal".

If that's the conclusion you arrived at from my posts, you need to go back to school to see if you can pick up a Kindergarten level reading comprehension

What I WROTE carried the implicit assumption that immigrants tend to,once they reach any critical mass, make the host country more like the place they come from. I've been to some of the areas these "migrants" come from for long enough to know that the term "Shithole" is an understatement if anything.

Post: #102

(06-01-2018 08:50 PM)PharaohRa Wrote:  

(06-01-2018 08:22 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Nonsense. The stats do not prove that at all.

Instead of posting a single line of text making an accusation why don't you walk us through how these statistics somehow prove that Peterson is controlled by Jews.

Go on /pol and read what they have to say about Jordan Peterson. They have analyzed him six ways to Sunday and have concluded as I have that he is subversive (and controlled by (((them)))).

Btw, it is uncommon when Zel and I agree on something!

No, you go on /pol and copy/paste the text here.

You don't make an accusation then tell people to go find supporting evidence for themselves.

It's weak and lazy.

Post: #103

Controlled opposition is bought and paid for. It's more that they know exactly what this boomer is all about and they are going to use him well to divert the attention of the angry/puzzled young white men and guide them into safe waters of being more "individualist".





The main reason why I don't think that Peterson is bought and paid for is because he probably is not a psychopath, he honestly feels for the people and sympathizes with the suffering of the people who had to go through the Bolshevik terror. Psychopaths don't do that. They are like Hillary Clinton celebrating when they kill a bunch of people and the Libyan country descends into chaos and turmoil costing many more lives. They are people like Albright who said that killing 500.000 Iraqi children via sanctions is a worthwhile goal to get rid of Saddam (which turned out an even greater killer since Muslim countries can only be led by a positive shitlord or dictator - not democracy). Those are psychopaths - they are the breed that are Nazis 10 years ago, Communist party members 5 years ago and libertarians today. They swerve towards the right belief.

Peterson is a true believer, he is boomer classical liberal not realizing that liberalism of the old US Masonic founding fathers was already part of a globalist plan. JP was just often quizzed by the higher shakers and approved to be invited again and again by the mainstream media.

Post: #104

I'm reasonably certain he believes that he can tread a path that results in a net positive for humanity, and that being disingenuous about certain facts of life (to put it nicely) is a reasonable trade-off for working toward the greater good.

He's not willing to split his audience by getting into Right wing purity testing bullshit. He's a true and genuine benevolent centrist, so unicorn-level rare these days in a sea of partisan shills and egos that it's almost impossible to believe he's not on the take.

I'm not saying he'll be effective in the long term but I'll put it this way. If I were building an intellectual seed bank to aid in the rebuilding of civilisation after a collapse then his work on fatherhood and its factors in healthy childhood social development would be among the premiere resources I would acquire.

Post: #105

(06-01-2018 08:50 PM)PharaohRa Wrote:  

(06-01-2018 08:22 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Nonsense. The stats do not prove that at all.

Instead of posting a single line of text making an accusation why don't you walk us through how these statistics somehow prove that Peterson is controlled by Jews.

Go on /pol and read what they have to say about Jordan Peterson. They have analyzed him six ways to Sunday and have concluded as I have that he is subversive (and controlled by (((them)))).

Btw, it is uncommon when Zel and I agree on something!

The chans? Same people that wrongly associated Peterson with the UN Podesta report?

After that blunder, I'd read /Pol with a fine-tooth comb and fact check all their arguments.

Also @Easy_C, genuinely curious as to who the Age of Vision author is. I don't think you mentioned him by name, so unless you can point to this guy, his experiences, and his content, it's hard to take it even remotely seriously.

Post: #106

(06-02-2018 10:13 AM)Genghis Khan Wrote:  

(06-01-2018 08:50 PM)PharaohRa Wrote:  

(06-01-2018 08:22 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Nonsense. The stats do not prove that at all.

Instead of posting a single line of text making an accusation why don't you walk us through how these statistics somehow prove that Peterson is controlled by Jews.

Go on /pol and read what they have to say about Jordan Peterson. They have analyzed him six ways to Sunday and have concluded as I have that he is subversive (and controlled by (((them)))).

Btw, it is uncommon when Zel and I agree on something!

The chans? Same people that wrongly associated Peterson with the UN Podesta report?

After that blunder, I'd read /Pol with a fine-tooth comb and fact check all their arguments.

Also @Easy_C, genuinely curious as to who the Age of Vision author is. I don't think you mentioned him by name, so unless you can point to this guy, his experiences, and his content, it's hard to take it even remotely seriously.

JP - was wrongly associated with a different UN sustainability report - but he did write another one - not with Podesta though. But that does not make it any better.

Post: #107

(06-01-2018 08:54 PM)Easy_C Wrote:  

(05-31-2018 02:02 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  Easy C - I like your reading list.
But seriously - your final assessment is you listen to prophets with visions - a nuclear war with Russia?

After all this reading you still came up with SJW-themes of "all immigration is equal".

If that's the conclusion you arrived at from my posts, you need to go back to school to see if you can pick up a Kindergarten level reading comprehension

What I WROTE carried the implicit assumption that immigrants tend to,once they reach any critical mass, make the host country more like the place they come from. I've been to some of the areas these "migrants" come from for long enough to know that the term "Shithole" is an understatement if anything.

Then my mistake - we simply disagree on the degree of nationalism. My opinion is that a certain ethnic consideration and demographics of the core ethnicity have to be taken into account when looking at immigration as well as internal population growth.

You don't wish to disregard it fully either as it seems. Neither one of us wants to end in a Nazi-larping state or a negative one where they start checking DNA-tests or guards walk around with skin-color palettes. But that is mostly overdone and not realistic. The Hitlerism Aryan cult was frankly a weird one where they hamstered the Italians and Japanese closer to being Aryan than the blonde blue-eyed Slavs and descendants of the Vikings in the Baltics and North-East Russia.

Frankly it seems more like our ideas are only apart in degree - the only good movement I see are led by the likes of the American Renaissance, but I see zero chance of them succeeding. Your idea that well-done civic nationalism with strong borders will be possible while keeping almost everything in place that has destroyed society - I just find it unlikely. In the past nationalism intrinsically meant an allegiance to a certain ethnicity.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/04/...a-carnage/

Quote:Leading Surgeon Says Violence in Khan’s London ‘Like South Africa’, Predicts ‘Summer of Carnage’

Meanwhile London descends into Brazil-like violence - only with more Muslims.

And Brazil is looking for worse:

Unfortunately there is always a racial component to it which does not come as a surprise with all of that. I understand that you don't want to support movements that were in any way or shape pro-White. They usually veer off into Nazi-larping and Jew-bashing and I don't think that this is organic. I really believe that they infiltrated quasi instantly.

And ultimately it does not matter - the awakening comes too late for most Western countries - the countries will both become a minority in the countries their ancestors built and what is worse - they will be a despised hated minority. The likelihood of future genocide in some countries - or at least civil war is very possible. At least the Americans have weapons so they are not going down without a fight - but looking at South Africa - that process can run for decades with ever worsening conditions.

Ultimately we just disagree only on the degree and way to go about it while in reality we are on the same side. And honestly - I doubt that either one of us will have any chance of seeing his vision manifested. I have had discussions with Teedub as well who also prefers the principle of civic nationalism while at the same time also not wanting for Whites to become a minority in Britain. So essentially it's a difference of opinion in terms of how to get at the desired goal. And again - no one of us will get our will - it will be the globalists who win, the demographics in some Western countries are already too far advanced and non-EU immigration continues at record rates. Enoch Powell considered 50.000 non-EU immigrants as massive - wonder what he would say to 500.000 per year as is the case in the UK.

That's why we criticize JP, because due to his massive influence then he will still not propose anything meaningful to halt this all. He has to acknowledge that Whites have to start to act pro-White and pro-collectivist while correctly warning of anything genocidal or extreme. But I am too pessimistic about it all anyway - nations come and go - UK, US, Canada, Netherlands, France, Belgium, Sweden - they will be wiped out in the current form - some will descend into civil war. That is how history goes.

Post: #108

(06-02-2018 03:59 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  I'm reasonably certain he believes that he can tread a path that results in a net positive for humanity, and that being disingenuous about certain facts of life (to put it nicely) is a reasonable trade-off for working toward the greater good.

He's not willing to split his audience by getting into Right wing purity testing bullshit. He's a true and genuine benevolent centrist, so unicorn-level rare these days in a sea of partisan shills and egos that it's almost impossible to believe he's not on the take.

I'm not saying he'll be effective in the long term but I'll put it this way. If I were building an intellectual seed bank to aid in the rebuilding of civilisation after a collapse then his work on fatherhood and its factors in healthy childhood social development would be among the premiere resources I would acquire.

This is what people can't get. Everyone seems to have worked out a master plan in their own head, and when Peterson doesn't line up with it, the character assassination comes out.

Jay Dyer's criticisms are especially ridiculous, because he claims to be a Christian, claims to live a life based on faith in Jesus, and yet he goes to town with all these pedantic, I have a degree in philosophy, arguments.

If Jay Dyer had faith, he wouldn't say that Peterson's philosophy leads inexorably to incoherent solipsism, because he would believe that God is in control and that all things are working towards the good.

All of these ethno-nationalist arguments are based on the assumptions that if there is a God, he is not getting involved in human affairs, and we will have to work this out for ourselves, and ethnic nationalism makes the most sense based on science and history.

God doesn't want us to fight the Jews, he wants us to convert them, and he hasn't clearly spoken on how he wants us to organize future society, but seeing as how all men are considered brothers in Christ, even if we did sort out by race, it would be purely practical, and with no animus to any other group.

If you are going to take a Christian point of view, which critics like Dyer and Vox Day claim to have, first of all, you are not supposed to judge non-Christians by Christian standards, and second of all, you have clear directives in the Bible not to be a mocker, and to turn the other cheek, and yet guys like Day and Dyer sound sometimes like schoolyard bullies making fun of an underclassman.

How can two people who don't even live up to their own philosophy be taken seriously when they accuse someone else of being in error or not living up to his?

The hypocrisy is amazing.

They are pretending, for the sake of their own proud feels, not to be sinners themselves and going hog wild.

God can and does work through whoever he wills, and he is not taking directives from Dyer or Day, no matter how righteous they feel themselves to be.

I would say the two of them are woefully bereft of spiritual discernment, and are foundering on the sharp rocks of coldly literal, overly analytical, and ultimately cold hearted rationalism.

Gonna have to quote Mr. Neubache again:

Quote: If I were building an intellectual seed bank to aid in the rebuilding of civilisation after a collapse then his work on fatherhood and its factors in healthy childhood social development would be among the premiere resources I would acquire.

Jordan Peterson is a gift to all men everywhere. He is teaching people to take responsibility for themselves and for their societies instead of being demoralized resentful snowflakes, and young men are flocking to him and changing their lives jsut by changing their mindsets.

And all people want to talk about are the Jews, race *realism,* and all about how he is secretly a puppet of the global masters.

This is all fine for atheists, but if you have a spiritual bone in your body, you have to know that the global elites aren't in power, they are only in power for now.

Peterson is calling for men to be better men, and he is doing it, sometimes imperfectly, messily, but he is doing it and young men are listening.

What sort of men do you want for the future, these guys or the ones who win arguments on the internet?

Forget that though, he ran from a fight when he was six, and Vox Day has a bunch of black belts and a hotter wife than Peterson, so, you know, wronnngggg.

Post: #109

A well reasoned criticisms of JP from 1:10:00 to 1:13:40





And at 1:15:25 "You won't live a good life by just living psychologically healthy. You need to have goals in life."

Post: #110

(06-02-2018 03:40 PM)Off The Reservation Wrote:  A well reasoned criticisms of JP from 1:10:00 to 1:13:40





And at 1:15:25 "You won't live a good life by just living psychologically healthy. You need to have goals in life."

Good stuff - fully agree.

He refers to the Muslim rape gang problem and that a cohesive collectivist Muslim group prey on atomized individualist working class people. The same things could not have been possible in the 1960s and 70s in the UK.

Why do I say that - because the Sikhs and Indians in the UK were initially the first victims of the Pakistanis and Bangladeshis going back to the 70s and 80s. It was easier to approach them, be of similar heritage etc. But what happened quickly was that the not atomized Indian community organized, created male defense groups and quickly made life very difficult for the Muslims. They partly did it by beating up those rapists, guarding the girls, having an eye out for every young one who met with an older guy. And they managed to stop it.

Only later did the Muslims turn towards easier prey - the working class girls who either did not have a father in the house or the father was one in 10 households unable to ever organize - being dependent on the globalist cops.

JP is doing exactly that - more individualism and more atomization for the conservative leaning or awakening liberal Whites - while non-Whites and other cultures like Jews don't give a shit what JP says (with very few exceptions - some of them here on the forum).

And honestly you need to be highly approved of at the top levels to even contribute at those high-tier UN panels. The UN is not a meritocratic institution - does not matter whether he worked together with Podesta or South Africa's Zuma - globalist collaborator is globalist collaborator. The UN is a private organization created by the likes of Rockefeller - many folk think that it's in some sort of collective government ownership. Nah - I can create a World Unification Society and invite countries to join too. I donate the land and give funds to start up the gist. That is exactly how the second UN started after the first private one got rejected initially.

So let us recapitulate - JP advice:

1) Whites who are patriotic right- and conservative leaning or are leaving the left - shall become individualist without any group interest
meanwhile
2) Whites who are SJWs and communists and progressives are fully collectivist and united in their ideas of anti-Whiteness anti-Western thinking
3) Almost all non-White groups have all collective interests usually joining the collectivist progressives - all the voting patterns back this up (exceptions like Sikhs in Britain exist, but are rather the exception to the rule)

So JP is working well to stop the first group of awakening and patriotic Whites to ever unite in order not to become minorities in their home-countries. Afterwards it won't matter anymore - maybe the old 80 or 90yo Peterson can then weep over the mass-graves of those Whites and claim that if only more had embraced individualism, then they would not have been slaughtered by the collectivists.



Edit - I would also like to state that it pains me at times to see him attacked by both sides so to say. He gets flak from the radical left and the lunatics who of course do not like his reasonable statements. We even let his part Blue-Pill-state pass, because he is data-driven and his female interviews don't matter too much for now. Though we simply cannot let his individualist "non-identitarian approach for Whites" - identitarian for anyone else ok - approach stand. He is just too popular and reaches the correct men who would otherwise become invested in saving their nations. It's really a pity. Someone even recently mentioned that he tries to appear more masculine now as his target audience has shifted - he grew out a beard to appear more shitlord and behaves stronger. It's as if even this is an act to appeal more to those men - before they go off and do something stupid like joining Sparta.

Post: #111

Basically, my opinion that I think a borders-based movement rather than a race-based movement is much more likely to be effective. There's some truth to the idea that blacks and hispanics are naturally redpill and some of that has been my experience: a lot of those guys I worked with in the military were redpill as hell about things like women and the courts compared to the average white dude.

We just need to hijack that tribalist instinct. The left has demonstrated amply how to do that , we don't have sufficient resources to make it stick. A movement that is extremely reactionary against anything perceived as harming tax payers is something they're afraid of for good reason. They know that if shit hits the fan that would result in us attacking elites rather than the current status quo where cities will divide into racially warring camps that are easily divided and controlled.

There's a reason Hollywood targets blacks and attempts to stoke a racial tribalism that is founded in violence against whites rather than in pursuing economic advancement.

Let's posit a paradigm where the identity options the right presents minorities is one between either being a winner on our team, or a useful pawn to be expended by the other side. It's powerful both because for most of us that's TRUE and because it's a bigger tent than is a movement for "white people". Think about how effective it was with Trump where he managed to turn out more black and hispanic support than any of the Republican candidates who said all the wonderful diversity talking points could ever dream of.

Post: #112

(06-02-2018 03:59 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  He's not willing to split his audience by getting into Right wing purity testing bullshit. He's a true and genuine benevolent centrist, so unicorn-level rare these days in a sea of partisan shills and egos that it's almost impossible to believe he's not on the take.

The older and wiser I get, the more Centrist I become.

I see evils and dangers both sides of the fulcrum.

Post: #113

Personally my belief is that all social progress in this world is built on truth. What is provably true, first. What is observably true second. Everything else beyond that is the burden of the individual and nobody else.

This is why I talk about IQ and Jews, not because I'm bitter and not because I have a superiority/inferiority complex, but because until people lay the truth bare and drag it out of the shadows (kicking and screaming if necessary) then there will never be genuine social progress.

The wise man builds his house on rock and the ignorant one on sand, modern engineering aside (a skill based on science, not guesswork).

What do I mean by this? Well people think that talk about racial IQ is damaging to social brotherhood, but the absence of acceptance for it fundamentally undermines your society. How? Well if you want a genuine meritocracy and you are unwilling to account for the reality of racial average IQ variances then when some races succeed more often than others then the only presumption available is that the groups not succeeding as often are victims of racism.

By ignoring a truth because it is unpleasant you have built your societal house on sand, and no matter how good your intentions were you will suffer failure.

The truth, always. Do gays suffer because they are victims of bigotry or because homosexuality comes with baked in mental disorders? Be careful what you choose because if you wrongly choose bigotry then you will turn your society upsidown to prevent a perceived prejudice that does not exist.

The truth, always. Do women fail because they are victims of misogyny or because being female comes with frailties and shortcomings in productive ability when compared to men? Be careful what you choose because if you wrongly choose misogyny then you will turn your society upsidown to prevent a perceived prejudice that does not exist.

The truth on the JQ, why they are so successful and the reasons that drive Jews to act so tribally in their own defence is itself a way to avoid another genocide or exile. Men like us recognise women for what they are and account for their nonsense, allowing us to lead better lives and accept women for their strengths and weaknesses. The JQ can allow us to do that for Jews as well, because we will no longer have to rationalise away what is plainly obvious leading us to internalise lies and adopt a world view that is at odds with reality (the source of much mental illness).

The truth now, or suffering later.

Post: #114

edit

Post: #115

Agree, Leonard. No truly great society can endure if it is founded on a constantly shifting relativistic bedrock. That opens the door to all sorts of chaos. That's why the left is cannibalizing itself right now. If you cannot find anything definitive then nothing has a literal meaning. Any old upstart can shift the meaning and you're back at a chaotic square one. Who wants to live in such a world?

Post: #116

Post: #117

All the white hate from the left, based on the talks of Peterson, and examining a few other sources of men and women who spoke on the problem of the beta and alpha male in the white community, all point continuously to me saying that feminism is a giant shit test, mostly directed at the white men. What Easy_C said about blacks and hispanics being a lot more redpill is completely true. They have a more grounded sense of reality and don't have a lot of first world problems that other cultures possess. The reason feminism is progressing is not because of minorities, but because white males are allowing it to happen. The movies, the media, our video games, our books, our native policies, all of it was done because men fell beneath the influence of females screaming enough for equality that never was needed in the first place. And yeah, if the entire system is made up of white males, then naturally it was the white males fault that we have the betaness of males that have sprouted up.

Sad part is, not even the minority figures or celebrities don't compensate for this loss of a role model that is masculine, strong, and has a grounding against the progression of the feminine mind. Blacks are kneeling in the NFL as they go against authority, celebrities are whining and complaining about a president they don't like being in office, shows are being taken down like kids knocking down a sandcastle they don't like being there, all of it is a real mess. And those few people who have values that stir away from the indoctrinated minds of our fallen world, they get the limelight taken from them. Jordan Peterson is the rare figure who actually gets a platform to speak to others, and as a result, he has managed to pull together a lot more white males than any celebrity could to change their lives.

So ironically, maybe we can thank whoever controlling the world's events, if the assumption that he's part of some controlled opposition is true, let's thank them for having the one moment of weakness where they gave a world stage to one of the most persuasive philosophers of our time.

Post: #118

Anonymousbosch pushed forward the concept of midwits here (apologies if I've misattributed that). It's the unfortunate stage of intelligence where people are capable of abstraction without quite being smart enough to come back to reality. Although the numbers I'm using are likely wrong they give the gist on the idea.

IQ 90: A man is looking at a woman.
IQ 100: A man is objectifying a woman by staring at her and therefore he is an abuser.
IQ 110: A man is looking at a woman.

The guys on the low end and high end of the scale are not smart or dumb enough to be manipulated and indoctrinated into seeing reality as anything other than what it fundamentally is. IQ 100 man tells IQ 110 man "he's objectifying her" and IQ 110 man replies "that's conjecture". IQ 100 man tells IQ 90 man "he's objectifying her" and IQ 90 man says "does that mean he thinks she's hot?"

Perhaps there's an argument to be made that the population's increasing IQ over the last 100 years (nutrition and k-select breeding) has raised a critical mass of whites from the dimwit range to the arguably more dangerous midwit range.

It would explain the radical departure from reality that so many whites have undertaken in the last 50 years.

Maybe one of the biggest and most difficult leaps for any race is the one from dimwit over midwit to fullwit(?).

Post: #119

I always considered the midwit to be something of a stage but some people never really grow out of it now because we're infantilized well beyond the time that we should be. You couldn't afford to be a midwit back in the day before social security, easy-access college loans and all the other stuff people can grab onto to make sure that they're not in the world hustling.

Even if you were a dumbass you were confronted with the truths of the world. You knew those debt collectors would whoop your ass and take away the things you had if you didn't pay up. So you knew to avoid borrowing money from the local loan shark.

In college, I definitely went through that midwit stage, then I started to realize that despite what everyone was telling me, things were not as they seemed. The job market was not getting better every day. You had to provide epic value or you were stuck working at Mickey D's.

I do think the redpilling process can break the midwit shell of a man if he is genuinely interested in seeking the truth. I do think if many whites did not have parents who coddled them so much, they'd realize what was really going on out here. I can't tell you how many layabouts with trustunds I run into in Asia. They're mostly white males, early-to-mid twenties and they have all these whacky beliefs about the world that have never been tested outside of the ivory towers of their college.

I suspect that if the ropes were to be cut and they were cast out into Asia without daddy's checking account following them at every step, they'd start "seeing the woman" too.

Post: #120

(06-03-2018 03:57 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Anonymousbosch pushed forward the concept of midwits here (apologies if I've misattributed that). It's the unfortunate stage of intelligence where people are capable of abstraction without quite being smart enough to come back to reality. Although the numbers I'm using are likely wrong they give the gist on the idea.

IQ 90: A man is looking at a woman.
IQ 100: A man is objectifying a woman by staring at her and therefore he is an abuser.
IQ 110: A man is looking at a woman.

The guys on the low end and high end of the scale are not smart or dumb enough to be manipulated and indoctrinated into seeing reality as anything other than what it fundamentally is. IQ 100 man tells IQ 110 man "he's objectifying her" and IQ 110 man replies "that's conjecture". IQ 100 man tells IQ 90 man "he's objectifying her" and IQ 90 man says "does that mean he thinks she's hot?"

Perhaps there's an argument to be made that the population's increasing IQ over the last 100 years (nutrition and k-select breeding) has raised a critical mass of whites from the dimwit range to the arguably more dangerous midwit range.

It would explain the radical departure from reality that so many whites have undertaken in the last 50 years.

Maybe one of the biggest and most difficult leaps for any race is the one from dimwit over midwit to fullwit(?).

One of the movie ideas I had would be to make a sequel of the movie Limitless. In the original he later uses his mental prowess to become a politician and try to change the world. I would have a sequel where it's supposedly about this power-struggle while in reality he was working diligently at spreading this super-enhancing drug across the world - spraying it across the globe. That scene would be shown as a last reveal while most of the movie would be mired in the usual elite power-struggle.

In the final minutes you would see suddenly the humble African bushman scratching his ass as the NZT kicks in - now raising his 155 IQ head up, looking at the hut he was inhabiting and saying: "I think that we can do better"

Then you would have a pink-haired fat feminist jerk up straight: "I am fat and I am making myself deliberately ugly. And feminism sounds like a crock of shit to me now. What have I been thinking?"

Muslims would be like: "Allahu Akbar? Let's read the Quran and Hadiths again and see whether it makes sense and is useful."

And the main hero would be laughing sordidly knowing full well that the time for easily manipulated humans has passed.

Post: #121

Am I the only one who thinks that things would descend into anarchy if everyone suddenly had 155 IQ? I imagine there'd be a lot of arguing and a whole lot of not doing anything.

Post: #122

(06-03-2018 04:24 AM)Fortis Wrote:  Am I the only one who thinks that things would descend into anarchy if everyone suddenly had 155 IQ? I imagine there'd be a lot of arguing and a whole lot of not doing anything.

Actually the NZT range would be more like 150-300 in IQ with added super-memory.

And yes - the first years would be one hell of a transformation with massive upheavals - but I will be like:



Because ultimately humans would find a higher equilibrium - continuing like before would be impossible. And likely some wars would be fought that are currently submerged. Those would be interesting times.

And that is where third movie in the trilogy would continue as humanity fights off the old and moves into an interstellar civilization. (or gets obliterated in the transformation - but I would be willing to make that bet - still sounds better to me than continuing with the current program)

Post: #123

Midwits I always took to be above average in IQ (relative to their surroundings), but not in the "very smart" tier (topwit?).

They're smart enough to tell that others are dimwits, but not smart enough to realize they're midwits.

This is Reddit, "skeptics", neckbeard atheists and last but definitely not least, women educated in "humanities" (and civic nationalists - trollface.jpg).

Number 1 sign someone is a midwit, is that they're making fun of dimwits.

How different wits react when faced with a topwit:

Dimwit: "You're crazy"

Midwit: "You're evil"

Topwit: "You're interesting"

It's a state of mind though, like Fortis implies, there's no natural law that you have to be an arrogant prick because you're a midwit. It's just media is pandering to these people. News are to midwits what conspiracy theories are to topwits and what mob mentality is to dimwits. It gets their gears going and not always in the right direction.

Post: #124

(06-01-2018 09:27 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

(06-01-2018 08:50 PM)PharaohRa Wrote:  

(06-01-2018 08:22 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Nonsense. The stats do not prove that at all.

Instead of posting a single line of text making an accusation why don't you walk us through how these statistics somehow prove that Peterson is controlled by Jews.

Go on /pol and read what they have to say about Jordan Peterson. They have analyzed him six ways to Sunday and have concluded as I have that he is subversive (and controlled by (((them)))).

Btw, it is uncommon when Zel and I agree on something!

No, you go on /pol and copy/paste the text here.

You don't make an accusation then tell people to go find supporting evidence for themselves.

It's weak and lazy.

Jordan Peterson is a shill

Btw, I find your obsession (along with some of the others) with him disturbing. Jordan Peterson says nothing new under the sun that you cannot find with self improvement and guidance here in the Manosphere, Zerohedge and the /pol sites. Jordan Peterson attracts men who are quick thinkers looking for an easy way out of their issues rather than committing the time to do their own research and understand the path to self improvement and understanding the way of the Universe.
He takes advantage of the fact that people are lazy and refuse to do their own homework and will buy anything a "professional" will say at face value. He also understands his audience quite well, which are Millennials with their short attention spans, and is counting on them to stay ignorant. Furthermore, he is one of the most dangerous of (((their))) tools in that he will tell you to improve yourself and give you hints along the way, but he will direct you into the direction that (((they))) want, which is the West's destruction.

If you really cared about finding guidance and want to do your part in destroying (((their))) grip on Western Civilization, I would forget about him and drop his poison, dig deeper here in the Roosh forum (there is ALOT of good information here), go on the chans (/pol and 8 chan specifically), and read up on philosophy, self improvement and history. It will take time for you to understand the true nature of the world, but it will be for the better. You can also use that knowledge to help guide other men as well, and they will need it!

Post: #125

(06-03-2018 09:56 AM)PharaohRa Wrote:  Jordan Peterson is a shill

Btw, I find your obsession (along with some of the others) with him disturbing. Jordan Peterson says nothing new under the sun that you cannot find with self improvement and guidance here in the Manosphere, Zerohedge and the /pol sites.
...

Do you sometimes wonder why you never get repped even thought you try to agree with all the popular sentiments here?

I'm guessing you stagger in from /pol with the expectant attention span of a field mouse on cocaine, dropping your single sentence posts and thinking that's how we do things here too.

Well let me indulge you and all the other anti-Peterson obsessives with a little reality check.

/pol and the young white male demographic was never a mere five minutes away from storming the battlements before Peterson arrived.

I myself fell into the trap with a lot of members of imagining a violent uprising of white incels if it weren't for that pesky shill Peterson but give it a rest. It's a fucking fantasy. Video game, porn and /pol addicts are not a threat to the establishment. The second a bullet whizzed over their shoulder they would shit themselves and hide in the closet for the next decade.

Whatever Peterson is or isn't, he's doing something and being effective doing it.

When are your one sentence posts on the RVF going to tip the balance of power, huh PR?

See, at the behest of a friend I actually listened to a JPpodcast and as a father I gained real and valuable insight from it.

What am I suppose to weight that against, eh?

The great incel uprising of 2018Q3?